sign in sign up
<<
Home , Battlement, Merlon, Murder hole, Piali Pasha, Stonemasonry, Venetian Arsenal

02D0691

Project Number: MADOO1C 1 (p

Fortification in the XVI Century: The Case of

An Interactive Qualifying Project Report

Submitted to the Faculty

of the

WORCESTER POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE

in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the

Degree of Bachelor of Science

By

Matthew Cardinal

and r

Joseph Rennert

Date: April 26, 2002

Approved:

Professor Michael Demetriou, Advisor

sc

Professor Roberto Pietroforte, Advisor Table of Contents

Chapter I- Introduction pages 1-6

Chapter II- Methodology pages 7-18

Chapter III- The Warfare Before Gunpowder pages 19-26

Chapter IV- Defensive Before Gunpowder pages 27-32

Chapter V- Change: From Pre to Post Gunpowder pages 33- 38

Chapter VI- Defending pages 39- 47

Chapter VII- , The Commercial Power pages 48-60

Chapter VIII- The Venetian Influences in Famagusta pages 61- 73

Chapter IX- Conclusion pages 74- 77

Appendix A pages 78- 81

Appendix B pages 82-82

Bibliography pages 83-84 Abstract

The changes in the Sixteenth century of the surrounding Famagusta,

Cyprus from pre to post gunpowder are studied. Methods of siege warfare and siege defense before and after the advent of artillery are compared. Literary research conducted describes evolutionary changes made in the design of

fortifications. The Venetian influence in the design of Famagusta's defensive structures

due to the progression of Fourteenth to Sixteenth century military warfare demonstrates the effect engineering technology has on society. CHAPTER I

Introduction

Engineering design change has been a result of technological advances made by societies, both past and present. During the period in the Mediterranean, the of Venice (Fig. 1-1) was a technological power, and they had an extreme influence on many in which they interacted with. One of these cities, and probably the most affected one, was Famagusta, (Figures 1-1, 1-2). During the Venetian occupation of the city from 1489 AD to 1571 AD, the city underwent a massive face-lift, sprouting new churches and Venetian palaces within. More importantly though, the Venetians completely revamped and reworked the defensive fortifications surrounding the city.

These structural came at the heels of the rapidly changing appearance of siege warfare in the Mediterranean.

Fig. 1-1: A map of Europe during the later medieval period, showing the locations of the two cities the report will focus on, Venice and Famagusta.

1

MEDITLIMAfriE.A N SEA RPASI SN:NSti

KYREN1A MOUNTAINS F4,164 el1).57,e, A EAY • • LAWS

NICOSIA POLLS KYKKOS • MONAITERY KA MAS OLYMPUS • NINSULA' AG M •TROODOS LAMACA. ,LA R. A • NAPA MASSIF Y / ) 1 Air KAT.°w r KOLOSSI J. LEMESSOS

EF1SKOCW le )

Fig. 1-2: The island of Cyprus. The city of Famagusta is located on the southeastern side of the island.

The report is aimed at detailing the factors behind the Venetian structural changes

in the defensive fortifications surrounding the city of Famagusta. It focuses on the

aspects of war itself, and the effects it had on engineering innovations. Certain time

periods lent themselves to certain strategic boundaries. During the Medieval era, warfare

had its limitations based on the technology of the time. From the knight-based armies to

enormous defending , warfare of this period had its tactical engineering

specifications to meet the technological boundaries. This report includes a description of

the basic offensive weaponry and tactics, along with defensive strategy and structures, of

medieval warfare. It explains the thought process behind the military engineers of the

1 1 th to the 14th century, and how the style of , the assaulting artillery, and the

offensive tactics forced them to design fortifications the way they did.

With the continuing importance of warfare in society, new steps were bound to

happen. Medieval warfare became a trait of the past as new technological advances were

2 being made on the defensive and offensive fronts. The invention of gunpowder drastically changed the style of siege warfare during the transition from medieval time to the Renaissance. New methods for fighting arose, and with these advances came counter methods of defense. The need for these counter measures and the reasons behind them due to the evolution of siege warfare are integrated into the report in the same manner that the discussion of Medieval warfare is. It tackles the issues of engineering concepts behind the structural changes of fortifications during the Renaissance period. The report discusses how the new siege artillery, propelled by gunpowder, ultimately changed siege warfare.

After specifying the elements of the siege, the weapons used, the means of defense, the armies that participated and their reasons, the report shifts into an analysis of the cities of Venice and Famagusta. It goes into detail about the occupation of Famagusta by the Venetians and how they came to rule. The location of the island and the advantages/disadvantages of this, how it affected the importance of the city's location in the , and how these aspects made Famagusta a wealthy and coveted trading post are discussed. The study analyzes how the Venetians affected the society of

Famagusta with their changes and how this ultimately lead to the demise of the Venetian presence in Cyprus. By indicating the importance of Famagusta during the Renaissance, the study reasons the Venetians' need for defending the city against any siege, and the need for reworking its current defenses. The project report details the success of the

Venetian military engineers used modern structural changes to manipulate the fortifications surrounding the city of Famagusta. It includes descriptions of the

3 engineering and architectural influence that Venice had on the city of Famagusta's defensive fortification.

As mentioned above, Venice was an economic and technologic power in the

Mediterranean during the Renaissance. The Venetians' advances in sea faring, fortification, and trade marketing made them a military force as well. The project report explains the success of the Venetians and the engineering advances they made.

Illustrating and describing the influences that the Venetians had in the physical appearance of Famagusta, most importantly the city , is the ultimate objective of the project. The report concludes discussing about the exact engineering and architectural influences that Venice had on the city of Famagusta's defensive fortifications.

4 Chapter II

Methodology

The first term (A term) was the beginning of an arduous journey to acquire information about the teams project. The groups first meeting with our advisors helped us to understand the nature of what we were studying and our goals for research. They gave us a stepping-stone from which we were entrusted with the responsibility to move forward with: use the Internet as a resource to gather information. This information would prove to be vital for the development of our project, but unfortunately was misunderstood by us and resulted in a loss of important research time. The following table summarizes our work throughout the term (Table 2.1).

A-Term Summary

Table 2.1

Week 1: Develop a foundation for research. Brainstorming for ideas on how to gather information on the specific subjects, namely the history of the city of Famagusta began. The team planned to exhaust at least one avenue of research by the end of the term, compiling notes at the same time. Week 2: Commence research on the project. The team started with the notion that focusing on our most available research platform and exhausting it would lend to a more comprehensive gathering of information for our project. The Internet was chosen based solely on availability standards. A system was set up of gathering data from the web: Web search — using conventional internet search engines, specific key words were used to locate web sites pertaining to the project. Most of the initial responses were related to the history of the city of Famagusta. Example keywords - "Famagusta," "Cyprus," "Eastern Mediterranean history," "Cyprus Famagusta history" "Venice history," "Venetian Architecture" Example websites hit - wvvw.cypnet.comincyprus.html

5 www.vtourist.cy.net/amohostos/ayia-napa/history www.trncwashdc.org/index.html http://lcweb2.1oc.gov/cgi-bin/query/r? frd/cstdy: @field(DOCID+cy0016) - From some of these sites we began to compile our initial background information about the city of Famagusta: where it was, what it was, and the history behind its story. Week 3: Continuing with the web. The team's findings findings were presented; resulting in being advised to begin a more in depth search not only of the internet, but to begin using the internet and its resources to find books. A list of websites was given to the team, relevant to the country of Cyprus and the city of Famagusta. Instructions were given to create a list of about ten books to retrieve data from and to submit it the following week. The team decided to divide the tasks accordingly. One member took the job of searching for books within our school library and other nearby libraries while the other focused on continuing the data extraction from the web with the new sites. Example books from list - 1) Venice, the Hinge of Europe 1081-1797, by William H McNeil 2) Crisis and Change in the Venetian Economy in the 16th & 17th Centuries, by Brian S Pullan 3) Imperial Age of Venice 1380-1580, by D.S. Chamber Week 4: Accessing literature. The team went to the WPI campus library and focused on getting up to five books or manuscripts with data/information on Venetian trade routes and the arsenal. There, each member focused on isolating Venetian trends in economy and trade, as well as the military technology they used in their conquests of the Mediterranean sea ways. Moderate success was realized, and note-taking from the books began. NOTE all of the books we had located and taken out up to this point were accounts and literature on Venice and the Mediterranean, not Famagusta directly Week 5 (a change in objectives) Exhausting the Internet: The team continued to use the various books to compile notes on Venice and its details. But the focus from this week to the end of the term lied in using the internet and certain databases to access information on the existence and location of books pertaining to military architecture and architectural technology in the 16th century Mediterranean and Famagusta. A rough outline including expectations for the introduction of the project's paper itself was submitted. Databases & Search Engines: Gordon Library Index World Catalog Denand (Holy Cross) Index Article First Google.com

6 Week 6 and 7: Summing up the term. The team created a tentative outline for the entire project and submitted it. The World Catalog and Article First databases located on the school's library web page were used to locate some books on Famagusta and other details related to our need for data. The team used these databases extensively, and submitted many examples of our findings. Also, time was spent searching with web engines to try and find some dissertations or journals written by PhD's on the subject of our project. A few examples were found of dissertations on mapping and recording of ancient stonemasonry and archaeology in Cyprus.

Examples of dissertations - 1) The Historical Growth of Famagusta and an Analysis of its Present Functions 2) Chronology of the Cyprus conflict 3) The Cyprus conflict: Ten Years after the Turkish Invasion

The results of our research over the first term were minimal when compared to the

overall scope of our project. Our idea for the direction of the report, at first, was to

gather as much data on the different buildings in Famagusta that were erected during the

Venetian occupation of the city and describe how they represented trends in Venetian

architecture. We had hoped to find sufficient information about Venetian-built churches,

palaces, homes, defensive structures, and various other buildings. Each week passed and

our findings were thin. In no way were we taking on the originally proposed topic of

Venetian influence in technology. The group was instead focusing on the art behind

Venice's architecture, a topic that is seldom discussed by engineers in a research project.

As previously stated, the idea of using the Internet to acquire data for the project

became instrumental, but we used it the wrong way at first. We attempted to find

literature, on topics that our project would address, directly from certain websites. What

we learned was that the Internet is not a reliable primary resource for information

regarding such specific topics as the Venetian society during the Renaissance, or the

7 structures within Famagusta. We spent the better part of the term searching aimlessly for information that just was not there, but not all of our work was ineffective. What we did discover was a method for accessing and finding valuable books in other libraries close by (i.e. Holy Cross, MIT) during Week 5 that contained pertinent information on our project. We also learned that our topic was not a well-documented one: relevant books and relevant web sites were few and far between. Our advisors also became aware of this through our struggles and we brainstormed for a new way to study the project's objective and approach data acquisition for it. They advised us to focus on analyzing the Venetian influence in Famagusta analogously. We were instructed to study the city walls of

Famagusta "Old Town": the well-preserved Renaissance city within the modern, present- day setting. The team realized that the majority of our research was incomplete, and that essentially we would embark on a new beginning to the project. This brought us to the beginning of the next term.

Our second term of work on the project (B term) began with immediate instructions and objectives: go to Rotch Library on the campus of MIT and perform a library index search for relevant books pertaining to military architecture in the

Mediterranean during the Medieval/Renaissance time period. We obtained a number of books containing essential information for us to begin the construction of our report.

The group found the books by doing a keyword index search on MIT's database Barton

(Table 2.2).

8 Barton Catalog

Table 2.2

# of Relevance Catalog Key Words # of Hits Availability and Titles Barton "Military 108 4 relevant: Architecture" #6 of 108 "City Walls" Yes

#37 of 108 " and Yes Fortifications"

#74 of 108 "The Architecture of No War"

#38 of 108 "Stronghold" Yes

"Military Barton Architecture 2 0 relevant N/A " "Military Barton Architecture 0 N/A N/A Cyprus" "Military Barton Architecture 13 0 relevant N/A " Barton "Fortification" 144 3 relevant:

#14 of 144 "Malta:.." Yes

#98 of 144 "The manner of fortification" No

#117 of 144 "A history of Yes fortification"

9 Barton Catalog (continued)

"Venetian Barton 1 0 relevant N/A Fortifications" "Fortifications Barton 0 N/A N/A Greece" "Fortifications Barton 0 N/A N/A Cyprus" Barton "City Walls 41 0 relevant N/A "City Walls Barton 7 0 relevant N/A Italy" "City Walls Barton 0 N/A N/A Cyprus" "City Walls Barton 2 0 relevant N/A Greece"

The team returned to WPI with a newfound pride in our project. Finally we had a vision of our goal for the project and some viable information to begin piecing together our report. Our advisors met with us, reviewed the sources we had compiled, and directed us towards how we should set up the report of our project and how we should continue to press on with the database searches for relevant books. The following weeks of the term

(Table 2.3) included more trips to Rotch Library and the initial steps to beginning the written report

10 B-Term Summary

Week 8: The mark of a new beginning We took at trip to Boston to MIT and performed a search for books on the Barton catalog. We looked at the relevant books that we got from the Barton Catalog to see if there was any useful information within them. We brought back the list of books we retrieved from the Rotch library. We also requested from the Cyprus embassy the history and a city map of Famagusta. Week 9: This week we went again to the Rotch library at MIT. We photocopied and read some of the relevant books Photocopied: Title, Author, and Table of Contents. Week 10: This week was the last time we have been to MIT. We photocopied entire important chapters of the books from the Barton catalog. We also read and ripped apart these chapters to get useful material for our project. We found the "Cities" magazine on Famagusta Week 11: This week we began to compile all of the information that we received from MIT. We started to look up specific details about fortifications. designs, engineering changes, schematics, various examples We looked at the changes from pre- to post- gunpowder fortification. We wrote mini-reports on warfare and post-gunpowder effects to fortification design. We analyzed the differences between different fortifications (castles and city walls): What were they protecting, why were they built, etc. Week 12: In this week we focus on warfare and sieges. We compared pre- to post- gunpowder warfare and how it changed. We looked at this to see the impact that it had on fortifications; how they changed to compensate for the different weaponry. Week 13: We basically went through the material again and pulled out specific material like: the weapons before and after gunpowder, tactics pre- and post-. Week 14: We wrote a full outline of our IQP We revised our Outline Wrote a report on what information we had. We compiled a detailed Bibliography of our resources. We pieced all of our information together for final report of B-term.

11 Accomplished B-term We obtained most of information need to fulfill our goals for the IQP We finally know how all this information is going to piece together for the final report. We now know where we stand and how much we have to do to complete this project. Research is basically completed. We tripled the amount of work done from A-term Goals for C-term We are going to fill the gaps that we have now for our project We need to gather more maps and pictures We need to focus on the report and most of our typing will take place during these seven weeks. We have to put together our methods for researching this project. We only have a portion of the project complete and in these seven weeks we will fulfill the requirements and more for this IQP. Need to write a rough draft. Revise the rough draft.

By the conclusion of the second term of our project, we had drastically increased the amount of effective research done for the report. We accomplished this primarily by developing a goal and direction for the report. Earlier in the term, we decided to gather as much qualitative and quantitative data we could on medieval fortifications, with the idea in mind that we would show the influence the Venetians had in Famagusta society through the study of the massive reconstruction they performed on the city's defensive fortifications. This was the one structure in Famagusta that we could find sufficient information on, though the sources we used did not necessarily address

Famagusta.

The team decided to set up a report that we incorporated the history of war and the defensive measures used against it, during the time period our project was analyzing (13 th 16 th century). It was advised to set up the report based around the implementation of gunpowder in weapons of war, because it was the discovery of this item that ultimately

12 resulted in the evolution of war technology. The report first explains early medieval war techniques and how they affected the design of defensive structures. Then it dives into the discovery of gunpowder and how new war tactics and weapons changed the method of designing defensive fortifications around cities. Following this it ties in Venice and

Famagusta, focusing on how and why Venice was interested in the Cypriot city and why

they wanted to defend it.

The idea for the physical report was rough, but finally we had a vision to aim our

research at. Initially we thought we could devise a plan to complete the report like one

would effectively complete a simple research paper: find some information and quote it,

reference it and explain it. This was the shortcoming we experienced in A-term, and it

turned our work during B-term into a hectic scramble to make up for lost time. At our

last B-term meeting we explained our goals for the final term of the project (Table 2.3).

The group used the B-C term break between the terms to acquire more

information on changes in military architecture from what our advisors termed as the

"best" library for architecture in the US. Avery Library at Columbia University gave us

one last definite source for books regarding architectural history. We were able to visit

Columbia University in New York City and perform a database search for relevant books

(Table 0.4). Although the Avery collection was more extensive overall than Rotch

collection, we only obtained one relevant book from the library. This book by Gianni

Perbellini turned out to be the only book we found directly describing the engineering

designs the Venetians used on the island of Cyprus, though it was about the city of

Nicosia, not Famagusta.

13 As we stated in the goals for the final term of our project, we needed begin writing the final report. We revised our outline of the report from the previous one we had submitted at the end of B-term. Each week of the term was used to write a different

chapter of the report, and sometimes two

Columbia University Research

Table 2.4

Catalog Keyword # of HitsiRelevancei CLIO Military Architecture 348 6 CLIO Siege Warfare 60 4 CLIO Military Architecture Cyprus 3 1 CLIO Medieval weapons 3 0 CLIO Military Weapons 1 1 th century 1 0 CLIO Fortification 1000 NA CLIO Fortification Cyprus 2 2 CLIO City Walls 254 0 CLIO City Walls Famagusta 0 0 CLIO City Walls Cyprus 0 0 CLIO Gunpowder 200 2 CLIO Famagusta 7 1

chapters were written in a week. The group took each B-term mini-report and placed

them within the rough draft of the final report and expanded upon each. We thumbed

through every source, books and web pages alike, and made sure that the proper

references had been made to credit each contribution to our paper accordingly. The team

added pictures, diagrams, and schematics into every chapter to give the report more

visual detail on what we were trying to explain in the text. The group referenced all the

figures as well. We used WPI's project database to find examples of previously

completed IQP's, and from those examples we developed the format to our report (i. e

14 Table of Contents, parenthetical documentation, Title Page, etc.). In Week 5 we had the majority of our rough draft completed, minus some detail work and a conclusion section.

We submitted the rough report for revision to our advisors in Week 6 of the term (Week

20 of the project). The report was returned to us, by the end of Week 6, with corrections and suggestions on the content of the paper. From the weekend preceding Week 7 to the final meeting of the term we worked on revising and editing every area of the paper as well as using two newly acquired books from our advisors to add some more detail to the report. The final draft is comprised of a Title Page, Table of Contents, Methodology, eight chapters, and Bibliography. The team completed the study with a presentation of our final report to our advisors and a submittal of the final copy.

15 CHAPTER III

The Siege Warfare Before Gunpowder

Pre-gunpowder castles and fortifications were expertly constructed to attackers on the exterior of the walls (Fig. 3-1). This made the siege of these castles a

long and arduous task. Armies continued to siege other places around Europe because there were not many fortified areas due to the extreme expense it took to build a

during the pre-gunpowder era. This was indicative of why places of wealth (i.e.,

Famagusta) were fortified so well, because they had the money for it (Duffy, 1979, pp

32). Even a simple stone tower was costly. For example, plain tower erected in England

between 1180 and 1190 cost about 2.4 million ducats (the monetary unit of England at

the time), when the crown income in England was no more than 12 million ducats a year

(Duffy, 1970, pp 34). As stone was fairly inexpensive (one or two ducats per one

hundred-weight), the most expensive part was the labor (Duffy, 1970, pp 34). These

massive stone structures were built by workingmen, and designed by military engineers.

The construction of a castle during this time lasted nearly ten years (Duffy, 1970, pp 32).

Based on some archaeological findings in Famagusta, the stone that comprised the walls

of the city is believed to be from another country (Gallas, 1979, pp 14). This puts into

perspective what its walls might have cost to build, importing all the materials and paying

for labor, though it was probably cheaper than the medieval castles. All this money being

spent on castles was worth it because the castles, in terms of being an effective

fortification, were pretty much invincible; siege warfare had not developed at the same

pace with that of fortification (Duffy, 1970, pp 35).

16 Fig. 3-1: Figure of a pre-gun powder castle. As can be observed, all of its towers are round shaped and there are distinct curves in its design (Adams-Pepper, 1986, pp. 5).

Quite simply, siege warfare did not begin to escalate until gunpowder was used in

Europe. The siege of a stronghold such as a castle or city relied on number of men and the conventional siege weapons of the time (Fig. 3-2). The main military hardware used for the siege consisted of two devices: battering rams, and catapults (Duffy, 1970, pp 4.0).

Battering rams were large, movable, wall-destroyers, usually manned by a group

of soldiers (Fig. 3-3). The weapon itself comprised of a large tree trunk that was hung

from a medium of motion such as a cart (Duffy, 1970, pp 47). The large battery device

was repeatedly driven into the gates, doors, and walls of a fortification. It was a powerful

and effective machine, but because the device itself had to used at an immediate range,

the high tower defenses of the castle could easily eliminate the operators of the battering

ram by dropping burning oils, boulders, or by shooting arrows from a high elevation onto

17 Fig. 3-2: Illustration of a tactic used in the 141" century to climb curtain walls. The defender is dropping objects onto the climbing attackers. This was one of many methods used to breach city walls (Brice, 1985, pp. 106). the attackers (Duffy, 1970, pp 47). To protect the soldiers from this defensive onslaught, battering rams came equipped with a roof constructed of wood and furs from animals.

The roof sheltered the operators of the battering ram from the castle's high defenses

(Duffy, 1970, pp 47).

18 Fig. 3-3: How battering rams were used as a main siege weapon before the invention of gunpowder. As illustrated. there is a roof protecting the men pushing the battering ram into the castles gate (homepage.mac.com/mfeinberg/castles/sieges.html).

Catapults were longer ranged wall attacking machines that could launch stones, fire, and other heavy projectiles at and over walls of the castles (Fig. 3-4) (Duffy, 1970, pp 51). In essence, they resembled a large slingshot. They were very expensive to build and design, which is why they began to decrease in popularity as siege warfare approached the gunpowder era. Bending its lengthy and bulky wooden appendage backwards operated a typical catapult, also known as a mangonel, and ropes spun around a large spindle acted as the source of tension for the release of the arm (Duffy,1970, pp

53). Once it was secured in place for release, the soldiers would place their choice of ammunition in the sling of the catapult and the contents of the sling were launched over the walls of the fortification. This style of catapult proved effective, but lacked power and range when compared to the most formidable design of catapult, the trebuchet (Fig.

3-5). This was a large counterweight machine. A typical trebuchet (twenty feet long)

19 could throw a 112 pound weight 230 yards, a 550 pound pig 200 yards, and a 700 pound piano 150 yards (Duffy, 1970, pp 59). They were very powerful, but extremely cumbersome. What catapults and battering rams had in mobility, trebuchets lacked.

Some trebuchets took 50 carpenters to build, and when broken down, took multiple carts to carry and drag to other locations (Duffy, 1970, pp 59).

Fig. 3-4: A catapult in the 12 th and 13th century. The boulders were placed into the arm of the weapon and then slingshot across to damage a city wall or castle homepage.mac.com/mfeinberg/castles/sieges.html).

20 Fig: 3-5: A 13th century trebuchet. Trebuchets are basically stationary catapults that were much larger. This weapon provides longer range and greater power then that of the catapult (http://www.castlewales.com/trebuckhtml).

These weapons greatly affected the tactics of the sieges themselves. For the most part a siege consisted of a very large army overrunning a much smaller garrison manning a particular fortification (Duffy, 1970, pp 28). The besieging army could attempt to assault the fortifications with battering rams and catapults, but due to the style of war and the weaponry used, an attack of this logic would result in many deaths and a waste of time. With the deaths of soldiers and the long periods of war came the expenditure of

most assets (Duffy, 1970, pp 29). Even with this fact, the most popular tactic used to

siege a fortification in the pre-gunpowder era was to maintain a long lasting attack with

considerable numbers of troops in order to starve and fatigue the garrison within,

21 eventually making the defenders surrender (Duffy, 1970, pp 28). Blockades were used; armies surrounded all entrances in and out of the fortified city to cutoff supplies. The catapults were used to hurl dead animals into the domestic regions of the fortification in order to spread vicious diseases (Duffy, 1970, pp 52). After a certain length of time had passed, the defenders would give up due to a lack of resources to sustain themselves.

This method proved too costly sometimes, and many sieges were lifted because armies could not afford to maintain a large enough attacking force for a sufficient amount of time (Duffy, 1970, pp 28). As a result of the long periods of time spent attacking a fortification, lords and nobles looking for more resources would continue to try and expand their feudal territory, creating a chain of warring within Continental Europe

(Brice, 1985, pp 15).

In a siege, if the walls of a fortification fell, it spelled impending doom to the garrison inside (Fig. 3-6). If tunnels dug by soldiers or battering rams and catapults were successful in bringing down a portion of the wall, an army could send their troops up over the rubble instead of scaling the dangerous and well-defended stone curtains of the castle using ladders and belfries (Brice, 1985, pp 54). Sometimes soldiers would try and infiltrate the castle during the evening period by climbing up a toilet drainage pipe (big enough to fit a human) or by bribing the operator to lower the gate and allow the army to storm in (Duffy, 1970, pp 84). One common ideal can be seen within all of these tactics though: the major obstacle the attackers faced were the thick, high walls of the fortifications. The military engineers of the time were a few steps ahead of the pace at which siege weaponry was evolving (Brice, 1985, pp 11).

22 Fig. 3-6: A city wall being breached. The opposing enemy quickly take's advantage and uses the rubble as a to cross the water filled . This was one of the main causes for the fall of cities in the Le century (Hughes, 1969, pp. 28).

23 CHAPTER IV

Defensive Architecture Before Gunpowder

As was stated in the previous chapter, the effectiveness of fortifications and strongholds was due to the slow developing field of siege weaponry (Brice, 1985, pp 11).

Castles became elaborate defensive structures, massive in size and even more formidable in appearance. These gigantic stone and guardians were located anywhere a country or feudal lord believed there was a need for protection: sea harbors, country highways, mountain passages, and in major cities (Hughes, 1969, pp 76). Military engineers of the medieval period designed these castles with the style of siege warfare in mind. The logic behind the appearance and physical structure of a typical medieval castle was based upon the need for defending the armies and weapons of the time (Brice,

1985, pp 44).

The walls of the castle consisted of many design techniques with specific purposes. Each characteristic of the castle's defenses was implemented by an engineer in the design of the fortification to give the garrison the best chance at defeating the siege

(Fig. 4-1). Walls were constructed by stone masons who used massive stone squares, sometimes weighing more than two tons apiece, to compile the curtain face. Many people were required to aid in the construction, often the entire peasant and working class population of a feudal kingdom.

An allure was the wall-walk along the top of a curtain wall (Fig. 4-1). They were accessed by a wooden or stone stair parallel to the wall, or sometimes by a mural tower.

Wall-walks were often paved with stone slabs. A later 13th century was an

24 overhanging allure. This developed into flying and . These eventually turned into the parapets found on most Renaissance, gunpowder-defending

fortifications (Brice, 1985, pp 53).

Fig. 4-1: Allure or walk way on top of curtain walls. These were used to walk on top of the wall or castle

to either scout or to get into position for battle (www.castlewales.com/casterms.html).

Fig. 4-2: Side view of a castle and its front defenses. This figure illustrates that there is much more to a ditch then a big hole. See figure 3-1 b for more details (Adams-Pepper,1986, pp. 4).

25 Table 4.1

A. Machicolations or machiclois gallery, bracketed upper-level works allowing defenders to drop objects to the foot of the wall. B. Merli solid protective components between . C. Curtain wall, section of wall or between towers. D. Ditch. U. Arrow holes, a place where defenders use their weapons.

Arrow loops, also known as arrow slits or bow loops, allowed defenders to fire their arrows from cover within a tower (Fig. 4-2, Table 4.1). The was an exterior defense, used to confuse attackers as they approached the gateway to the castle from the attacking field. It was usually walled and sometimes maze-like, and it kept the attacking forces spread out in the perimeter defenses, where the garrison could easily shoot arrows at them from their protective towers (Brice; 1985, pp. 51).

Bartizans were similar to a crow's nest of a naval vessel. It was a projected angular point rested at the highest point on a castle. , which become the most immediate and important change to gun powder defenses, was a projection used to eliminate dead ground, flank walls, and provide crossfire against attackers (Brice, 1985, pp. 53). Dead ground is similar to a blind spot (Fig. 4-3).

26 Fig 3-3: Castle built in the 12th century. As pointed out at the peaks of the castle there are that perform many tasks: looking post, defense against enemy crossfire, able to drop objects onto enemies, etc. (www. castlew ales. com/casterms . html).

A batter was the base of a wall or tower, usually angled. This feature inhibited tunneling beneath the walls, and also helped project weapons that were dropped the high defenses of the towers. It also served as a deflection for the battering ram (Brice, 1985, pp. 49).

Battlements are the signature features of a castle and its walls (Fig. 4-4, Fig. 4-5).

They typically run 2 feet wide and 3 feet high. They gave the garrison an opening to fire weapons from the top of the castle while providing protection against the wall-scaling attackers and projectile from the battlefield in front (Brice, 1985, pp. 49).

Merlons and embrasures are both part of the . They are the most noticed part of a castle or fortification. are the saw tooth effect or the teeth of the battlement. Merlons are the part of the battlement that protects the defender while he

27 defends the fortification. Embrasures are the opens between the two merlons. An is the section of the battlement where the defender shots his arrow or drops a heavy object upon an enemy (Fig. 4-4).

em brasti re

battlement or crenelation

Fig 4-4: An illustration showing the difference between embrasures and merlons. As pointed out they are both located at the top of the battlement (www.castlewales.com/casterms.html).

Fig 4-5: A tower with on top (point A). These enabled the defenders to attack but at the same time be defended by part of the wall (www.castlewales.com/casterms.html).

The curtain wall was the surrounding structure of the castle's interior (buildings).

The walls were normally connected by flanking towers and ranged from 6 to 20 feet in

28 thickness. This is another area where arrow slits were placed so that the garrison could safely fire at the attacker from the safety of the fortification (Brice, 1985, pp. 50).

A hoard was used to cover dead ground at the base of the curtain wall (Fig. 4-6 a, b). It was a covered wooden gallery with holes in the floor, typically positioned in front of the battlements. It allowed the garrison to observe and attack the siege at the bottom of the walls (Brice, 1985, pp. 51).

hoard A B

_ '! __ •

. - _ 7 • , -1

' • ' 1 -7 - -

Fig. 4-6 a-b: Where a hoard is place and how it is used. Fig. 3-4 a is what a hoard looks like from the outside but Fig. 3-4 b graphically illustrates what it looks like from the inside (www. Irabid.org/web/web%20de%2Ohistoria/h/hoadhtml).

Machicolations were opening gaps that were located in extending parts of the framework, such as parapets, that allowed the garrison to drop projectiles straight down a vertical axis onto the attackers (Fig. 4-2, Table 4.1) (Brice, 1985, pp. 50).

29 were a very common sight amongst pre-gun powder, and even post- gunpowder fortifications. A large ditch that was very deep and surrounded the entire castle, moats were commonly filled with water from a nearby water supply. This prevented the footmen of the onslaught from crossing over to the castle in haste, and

made it a rather tedious task. Sappers were inhibited in their tunneling exploits by the

watery landmark. Attackers used portable , called barges, to cross the and

besiege a castle. Most castles though had just a dry moat, otherwise called a ditch (Fig. 4-

1, Table 4.1). The city of Famagusta has a ditch encompassing its walls. Most all post-

gunpowder fortifications that had moats kept them dry (Hughes, 1969, pp 71).

The , which became a very important part of high defense fortification

with the invention of gunpowder, was simply a wall shielding the castle defenders on the

wall-walk from arrows and other siege projectiles (Fig. 4-1, Table 4.1). One can see that

when armies eventually grasped the ability to use and guns, that this defensive

piece became very important (Brice, 1985, pp. 50).

The most common aspect of a castle or fortification of these times, besides the

curtain wall, was the towers (Fig. 4-1, 4-2, 4-3). Some were flanking towers in the curtain

wall, towers, smaller stair, or mural towers. They provided access to all the

high points of the castle itself, such as lookout spots, and they were the source for the

high defenses, which were eventually eliminated when gunpowder surfaced in Europe

(Brice, 1985, pp. 52). Not only did these high defenses become eliminated, but also the

towers themselves became obsolete.

30 CHAPTER V

Change: From Pre to Post Gunpowder

As with so many aspects of life in the century that ushered in the modern world, the art of war underwent an enormous transformation. Gunpowder technologies -- mobile and effective cannon and reasonably useful small firearms (arquebuses, muskets, and pistols) had a profound effect (Fig. 5-2, Table 5.1), in the technology of war. Although cannon had been in use since the 14th century, Charles VIII's invasion of Italy in 1494 saw the first light, mobile cannon dragged over the Alps and used to wreak havoc on a large scale (Fig. 5-1). The production of was expensive and monopolized by the great sovereigns who could afford it. This monopoly contributed to the rise of the centralized state (Duffy, 1970, pp.35).

Fig. 4-1: A 1.5 th century cannon. This is one of the first cannons used in battle. To fire this cannon you would have to ignite the wick at the back end of the cannon.

31 The earliest of cannons were usually tied to a wooden platform or board to enable the massive gun to be angled at a certain degree. This allowed for some aiming and also altering the range of the shot (Bradbury, pp 285). Even safer but not always possible was the placement of the cannons on a slope or a prepared mound of dirt. The problem of using the wooden platform was the recoiling of the cannon usually damaged the platform.

Better mobility of these cannon was achieved by the invention of trunnions in the early

15 th century (Bradbury, pp 286). Trunnions were two wooden wheels that were placed on the bottom of the wooden base of the cannons. Now once the cannon has been figured out the next step is to make these larger and more powerful. Larger meant that these cannons would need larger rounds that would cause more damage pre- shot. Larger guns were in need for siege warfare, but the larger the gun, the more gunpowder used, and the greater the explosion. By the 1375 cannons were shooting balls that weighted up to 100 pounds but between 1382 and 1388 they jumped for those 100 pound to 318-pound balls

(Bradbury, pp 288). The men who produced these gigantic balls were paid sixpence a day. Now cannons are starting to be useful in crushing and demolishing walls. With these large cannons, which were able to knock down fortified walls, long sieges became less common. These cannons got so large that to transport one they needed fifty oxen and

2000 men. By 1522 cannons were loaded with 1,200-pound balls and when these balls struck a wall it crushed it and made the entire city walls shake. Cannons did not only use large stone balls as ammunition instead they used various kinds for different situations.

Different kinds of shots consisted of a round shot, chain shot, canister or case shot, and grape shot. The round shot was made of dressed stone but by the 17 th century it was made from cast iron. The round shot was the most accurate projectile that could crush curtain

32 walls. The chain shot is two small round shot linked by a length of chain. This was used to take out multiple enemy ground troops. The problem with this type of ammunition was that because the projectile was smaller than the bore of the cannon, chain shot was inaccurate and was only used in close ranges. The canister or case shot are 12 or so small round shots in a metal can, which basically brakes up a large crowd of enemy troops.

This type of shot acts like today's grenade. The grape shot is small stone balls which are contained in a canvas bag. The last three shots were designed to maim the ground troops.

By the end of the , enormous cannons could be built, and large numbers of guns brought to a siege. Cannon became the essential weapon in most battles (Bradbury, pp 291).

Table 5.1

RANGE RECOIL

Total Diameter Powder with 50 degree incline

Nature of Gun Length of Shot Weight ' Charge Elevation Carriage

Ft. In In Lbs. Lbs. Yards Ft. 42 Ponder 9 6 6.7 6720 14 1,940 - 32 Ponder 9 6 6.1 6216 10.5 2,080 11 24 Ponder 9 6 5.6--- 5600 1 8 1,800 11 24 Ponder 6 6 3 696 6 1,550 10.5 18 Ponder 9 0 5.1 4704 6 1,800 - 12 Ponder 8 6"-- 4.4 3808 4 1,580 - 9 Ponder 8 6 4.0 3528 1,620 -

33 68 Pdr. Carronade 1 [7.9— 36.0 r-5:5---- 1,280 - 42 Pdr. Carronade 6.7 22.2 3.5 1,170 - 32 Pdr. Carronade 4 0 6.1 17.1 2.625 1,087 - 24 Pdr. Carronade 3 0 5.6 11.5 2 1,050 - 18 Pdr. Carronade 2 4 5.1 8.5 1.5 1,000 - 12 Pdr. Carronade 2 2 4.4 5.9 1 870 -

Feudal castles or medieval town walls could be knocked down with little effort with modern, mobile cannon (Fig. 5-1). This advantage did not last long of course, as military engineers quickly replaced high medieval walls with thick, squat, star-shaped fortifications studded with bastions. These fortifications were largely urban, not allocated to feudal lands, like the medieval castle. These city walls protected the city and its people not like the castle, which in most cases protected a king or nobleman. The countryseats of the local nobility became Renaissance manors, while military actions were fought over towns (Brice, 1985, pp.76). By warring for against a town for right to its possession, city-states and empires were able to amass greater resources and economic stability.

Even more significant than cannon was the use of smaller firearms: the arquebus, and later, the musket (Fig. 5-2, Table 5.1). Although lacking the accuracy and range of the old missile weapons (bow and crossbow), a is easy to learn to use. This meant that relatively untrained peasants could be made into a more-or-less useful soldier with relatively little training and expense. While a master bowman took a generation to produce and was a rare commodity, an army of arquebusiers could be thrown together in

34 weeks. They might be ill-trained and ill-disciplined but they could be more effective then highly trained archers. (Duffy, 1970, pp. 40)

The arquebus, a relatively lightweight firearm that uses the slow-burning match as a firing mechanism, eventually gave way to the heavier musket (Fig. 5-2, Table 5.1). The arquebus fired a one-ounce ball and had a range of about 100 yards, while the musket fired a 2-ounce ball and had twice the range. The musket was heavy enough that a musketeer required a forked stick to rest the barrel on when firing the weapon. This extra accessory made reloading a complicated procedure, but the increased firepower made it worthwhile at the time.

The transformation of the feudal knight (a high quality independent warrior) into cavalry (a tactical body used for its mobility and massed force) was another significant change, both socially and technologically. All the social privileges of the nobility were based on the assumption that they owed the service of arms to the king in exchange for the land that supported them. The feudal knight trained all his life for war, and in return was expected to answer to his king when called upon. However, the feudal knight was not expected to remain in the field for more than 40 days of service. So the feudal knight was likely to disappear to look after his own estates if they were endangered or if the battles were not good for collecting ransoms and money. The feudal knight paid no taxes, owing the "tax of blood", but got no pay either. The feudal knight provided his own horses, harness, and support troops. It was impossible for a medieval king to keep a reliable source of troops on hand for strategic purposes, but he also did not have to spend the kind of cash that later kings did on standing armies (Viollet-le-Duc, 1990, pp. 107).

35 Fig. 5-2: Depiction of the first gunpowder weapons used in the 15 th and 16 th century. See table 4-2b for more details (Adams-Pepper, 1986, pp. 16). Table 5.2

A. Wheel lock The trigger releases a clockwork powered serrated disc which pistol strikes sparks by spinning against the flint held in the screw jaws. It was an expensive device, which explains why it was used most often by cavalry. B. Arquebus Showing forked rest and trigger mechanism. By raising the trigger tram the smoldering match cord is brought down to ignite the powder in the flash pan. The flame then passes through the "touch hole" to charge in the breech. C. Moschettone A swivel mounted rampart gun, with detachable chamber piece secured by a wedge. D. Tromba di This picture is sectioned to display internal profile of the barrel. fuoco or wooden scatter gun

The charge of heavily armored knights, armed with an 18-20 foot lance, in a shallow line on open terrain, is nearly irresistible. But by century's end, the heavy lance charge had largely lost out as a tactic. Instead of these armored knights with lances they were now lightened armor soldiers armed with pistols. By contrast to the feudal knight,

36 the cavalry soldier required less of an investment. He needed to be able to stay in position and go where he was told. A deep formation of them armed with wheelock pistols could spew out a murderous, if somewhat random, fire, and be moved quickly as a tactical striking force in the hands of a competent general. Pistoleers ended up lightening their armor and depending on their mobility for protection. They could be raised at need from professional mercenary troops. Also Reiter 's became into play. Reiter's were horseman armed with a pistol. Since pistols only have one shot, a Reiter carried as many as he could -- a couple slung in front of the saddle, maybe one or two in his boots, and maybe even across the back of the saddle. The move from the lance to firearms was a slow and irregular one. (Viollet-le-Duc, 1990, pp. 107) These types of change greatly affected the art of fortification. Before gunpowder was invented the towers had large opens for the purpose to shot arrows thought. The archers need this room to extended his arms and aim but with the invention

Leaving aside the heavy artillery, a typical army was composed of all these three arms: horse, pike, and shot (arquebusiers and musketeers). They complemented each other: the pike and horse provided protection for the shot, which were extremely vulnerable to attack. Reloading is time-consuming, and without cover arquebusiers will be run down by cavalry. However, with cover on broken terrain, the arquebusiers can pick off horsemen with little to fear from the long lance. The horses provide mobility and striking power, the pikes a powerful defense. The ideal proportions of horse to pike to shot in an army were frequently debated. However, horse, as the most expensive, was always the smallest component, and became smaller as the century wore on. Among the infantry, the proportions of pike to shot changed over the years as well. How to mix

37 firearms with pikes was one of the technical issues of the day, with firearms becoming a more and more prominent component over time. By the seventeenth century, two-thirds of the infantry would be firearms. (Viollet-le-Duc, 1990, pp. 110)

38 CHAPTER VI

Defending Artillery

By the fourteenth century the impact of gunpowder was having its effect on the practice of warfare. The defense was still vertical, the utilization of high walls being imperative because of the vast investment in existing walls and castles. The walls were thickened to withstand the impact of gunpowder-propelled cannon balls. Exposed walls were sometimes covered with earth or wood to absorb the shock of these cannon balls.

Circular or rectangular towers tended to be replaced by pentagonal or oblique-sided ones to deflect the shot. Combustible wood projections were removed from battlements and the ditch (Fig. 6-1) made more of an obstacle, wider deeper so that a broken wall would

not fill it and cause a bridge for the attackers. (Brice, 1985, pp. 103)

The invention of gunpowder gave advantages to the defenders themselves. All the

devices of merlon and embrasure, and , and

concentric curtain walls, all worked just as well for firearms as they did for hand-

propelled weapons. The man scaling up the wall was in no position to reload his piece

once he has used it. The altitude of the cannons on the castle towers enabled them to

shoot further than the cannons at ground level. With a solid shot it could bring down

enemy siege towers, shatter scaling-ladders placed against a neighboring tower and

tumbling a score of men into a rocky ditch. If these siege towers gain a grip on the curtain

wall, they could be swept from it by a single charge of small balls, nails, or miscellaneous

hardware called latigridge. (Brice, 1985, pp. 100)

Another concern was the accommodation of artillery. Not all defense were ready

to adapt to the new technology. Big cannons needed solid mountings and plenty of room

39 for reloading and use. Initially these requirements were satisfied by reducing towers to the same level as the walls and reinforcing both elements to a series of high platforms, connected by board galleries for the movement of weapons (Fig. 6-4). High platforms themselves sometimes made vulnerable targets and forced the defenders to angle their fire sharply downward, which was much less effective than a horizontal trajectory. The precautions taken against damaging blows from cannon balls was to thicken the walls.

The walls had to be thickened up to 5 times more to withstand these blows. Another precaution was to slope the walls in the form of an escarpment from a line two-thirds of the height up the tower (Fig. 6-1).

SECT ION

Fig. 6-1: The changes made from an earlier, pre-gunpowder tower fortification to a modernized artillery-defending wall of the 15 6 and 16th century. In the early version, we see the stress on vertical height to prevent breaching of the walls by climbing. In the later version, we see several drastic changes. First the shortening of the height of the wall. Second, the slope of the wall raising two-thirds of the wall height, almost the inverse of the slope of the rising land before the ditch in front. The lines show the angles that the carefully carved terrain created with the wide base of the gunpowder defending structure. Letters correspond as follows: Al- wall walk, N- parapets, 0- rampart, P- escarpment, Q- ditch, R- counterscap, S-.

This also made scaling the walls more difficult. The arrow loops also had to be modified from hand propelled weaponry to gunpowder weaponry. This usually took the form of a round hole at the base of the arrow-slit known as a "cross-and-orb". For larger artillery the arrow-loops were opened out into full-scale embrasures. Blocked with shutters when not in use, the inward part had to be very wide to enable gunners to cross their weapons

(Hughes, 1991, pp. 37).

40 A major change from before to after gunpowder was the design of the angle . A bastion is a triangular shaped platform where troops would defend its city or fortress (Fig. 6-2). Guns mounted on its flanks could sweep the neighboring curtains, so that with a properly planned defensive scheme any assault on the main walls would have to pass through a cross fire from two adjacent flanking batteries. Guns or cannons mounted on the faces fired outward to break up siege batteries. Circular or rectangular gun platforms could produce an identical combination of artillery positions but the angled, triangular pointed shapes were the only forms capable of eliminating the blind spots of the defense (Fig. 6-6) (Adams-Pepper, 1986, pp. 3).

Fig. 6-2: The typical angle bastion. Notice the multiple platforms for the transportation and defense of the heavy artillery used to ward off the siege. The gunmen mounted themselves amongst these platforms so they could obtain a variety of angles to shoot at the oncoming soldiers. The siege attackers were divided three-fold because of the projecting tip of the bastion and its proportionally widening base.

Three far-reaching consequences were inherent in the new shape:

41 1. The provision of a distinct and wide flank enabled the defender to bring a heavy

crossfire to bear along the ditch (Hughes, 1991, pp 25).

2. The meeting of the two faces of the bastion in an angle effectively eliminated the

patch of dead ground which had existed in front of the circular medieval tower,

and opened clear fields of fire for the flanks of the neighboring bastions (Fig. 6-4,

6-5). No longer did an individual tower have to provide for its own close-range

defense (Hughes, 1991, pp 25).

3. The long, straight parapets of an angular bastion enabled the defender to mount a

greater quantity of cannons than was possible in the case of a circular tower of

similar dimensions and cost (Hughes, 1991, pp. 25).

f .

Fig. 6-3: Another model of the angle bastion and the they protect. This design shows the many individual compartments and areas implemented by the engineers to hold the artillery during the siege. The traversing platforms can also be seen here that allowed the defending garrison to rotate the cannon for a variety of shot angles at the oncoming attackers. The parapets are shown extending across the surface of the bastion, where the garrison could mount many cannons.

42 The ditch or rampart also became increasingly more important. The ditch served three important functions; it forced miners to dig deep, it was the main obstacle to the

approach of infantry, and it shielded the lower part of the wall for heavy fire. Itself quite

invincible to attack, it would have to be bridged or filled before the main walls could be

reached (Pepper-Adams, 1986, pp 18).

Fig 6-4: The geometry of artillery defense. The defending cannon is placed on the parapet, aimed at an angle perpendicular to the slope of the glacis, which was the slowly rising earth formed by engineers surrounding the fortification. The ditch is also sloped, eventually encountering the rampart and the sloped wall. This displays the enormous amount of terrain modifting that the engineers also implemented around artillery defenses.

43 ARVItTMEer OP TJIR SCARP (1440^1.”0/

Orilt-REVIMAINT OP 7111 SCARP tif,01J - ITUO)

Oasis

camas-ad •••7 pas wit t.trtt, Lairs

countersoarp tarp

OrfitclIAO SLAM' I, 100

Fig. 6-5: The evolution of the escarpment and , the barriers of the fortification. The glacis approaches the wall on a slow incline, the reaches the counterscarp, which is the sharply dropping barrier on the far side of the ditch in relation to the fortification wall. The escarpment represents the entire uprising slope of the wall facing the enemy.

However the most significant change was the placing of the new artillery that most clearly distinguished the different design solutions in new works. Amongst the very

earliest purpose built firearm fortifications were gun chambers set on the floors of dry

ramparts, often completely detached from the parent fortress. These gun chambers would

be called pillboxes today. Located at the bottom of the ditches protected them from

enemy guns and gave their defenders a fine field of horizontal fire along the foot of the

main fortifications. (Pepper-Adams, 1986, pp 19-20)

The art of defense consisted in the ability to economize with soldiers so that a

bastion could resist a much more powerful attacking force. This was achieved in three

ways. First, by providing cover so that the defenders could not be seen and shot at. This

advantage would prevent the enemy from seeing the defender making it almost

44 impossible to for the invader to shoot them but making it easier to shoot the invader.

Second, by making the position of the defenders as inaccessible as possible; obstructed and difficult to approach. This was achieved by ramparts and ditches. This made the way for the invaders to reach the walls difficult and was only a disadvantage to the enemies themselves. And third, by giving the defense the advantage of height, so that its soldiers were able to observe the enemy without themselves being observed (Hughes,

1969, pp 114). The first essential then was cover. This was achieved by constructing high enough cover for the tallest man and thick enough to withstand the heaviest shot likely to be thrown at it. Bastions were usually constructed about eight feet high to provide cover against shot pitching over the crest. Three feet was enough to stop musketry, but about eighteen feet of earth or was needed to withstand the pounding from an eighteen-pounder gun (Hughes, 1969, pp 115). In front of the bastions were ramparts that prevented the enemy from climbing them. A defense should never be static and the most effective defense is what is augmented by sudden offensive strikes that take the enemy off balance. Traversing platforms had to be provided so that the guns could be swung around to fire in different directions. had to be built behind the guns so that they could not be raked from flanks by enemy fire. Embrasures had to be cut in the bastion. These consisted of a neck through which the gun fired and splayed cheeks so that it could be swung around to fire in an arc. A higher arc provides maximum distance.

Embrasures had their disadvantages, for although they protected the guns they restricted their use and they also tended to act as a funnel for enemy shot. They also pinpointed the

position of the defending guns to the enemy. By implementing these changes, military

45 engineer tried to design the perfect fortification of a citadel or castle (remnants of medieval siege fortifications) (Fig. 6-8).

Fig. 6-6: Four designs of bastions. The design in the upper-right is the one the Venetians eventually used to build the Martinengo Bastion in Famagusta. Both of the designs on the left, labeled "E," represent earlier fortification styles of round and square tower. The angle for discharging artillery was still functional from these designs, but the length at which one could fire was considerably shorter compared to the great length and angular range that the angle bastions on the right offered. Notice the multiple sloping platforms that quickly rise to the actual artillery platform on the angle bastion. It was this slope that prevented out-right scaling of the fortification.

46 Fig 6-7: The design for a uniformly surrounded, modernized, artillery-defending citadel. The star shape created by the three bastions on the north side is a design characteristic displayed in many Venetian designs.

47 CHAPTER VII

Venice, The Commercial Power

Venice, from the 13 th to the late 16 th century, was immersed in an Imperial age.

After the crumbling of the , Venice began a revival of trade and city life as early as the 9 th century and had grown rapidly since the 11 th century. The time period in which Venice became most influential in the Western Mediterranean was from the late 14th century to the 16th . To increase its domain, Venice took advantage of numerous opportunities due to other nations faltering, such as the succession crisis of the

Angevin dynasty of and the collapse of its eastern pretentions, the weakness of the restored Byzantine Empire, the shortage of heirs to particular fiefs in Greece, and the growth of the and Turkish influence (Chambers, 1970, pp 42). The opportunistic Venetians used their good fortunes and stretched the empire to its greatest lengths; from the mountain passages of the Italian Alps, to the entire Western seaboard of the Peloponnesian peninsula, as far south as and as Far East as the island of Cyprus and the city of Famagusta.

The Venetian empire was essentially a commercial enterprise, and commerce was the primary and principle source of the city's power in the Mediterranean (Chambers,

1970, pp 7). This aspect obviously created an unlikely combination of vital components for the empire's success. Where typically castles, barracks, and garrisoned troops might be the sign of an empire's underlying structure, Venice's most important pieces were its warehouses, ' holds, and barges (Chambers, 1970, pp 33). Trade and the defense of its trade posts was the formula Venice used in amassing its wealth and territories.

48 Before Venice became the center for transportation and trade in the

Mediterranean it worked on a smaller scale. The city was naturally defensible, guarded by the Appennines and the Julian Alps, and was easily accessible from the plains of northeastern Italy (Chambers, 1970, pp 7). Due to its natural defenses, the city inherited and became the successor in control of the late Roman ports of Aquileia and Ravenna

(Chambers, 1970, pp 7). The city engaged itself in the local transportation of salt, corn, timber, and wine along the coasts of the Adriatic Sea and up the rivers of the plains into the north (Chambers, 1970, pp 7). This was a source of continuous wealth, but these ports also lent the opportunities for Venice to establish long distance trade.

• Maihr 4 ..... " Lutetia 1 " 1 ...... GermaniWc Avar Khanate ...,,

', Burdigala s Tribes ...

, i Lugdunum '-',.., ,rj '",--.

yTh... --, ..,

'w Ravenna Block seo Sardinia ! •Corduba • Dyrrhachium * -r ibem Sevilles :c..1%7srsalonica *Carthago tol Tingisf Nova Byzantine Sicily Empire qur Caesarea, . °Athens -Carthage . m• ‘t‘ 4. °Antioch

Crete !" ." .Medgerraneari Sea ° r-*Grans ( .A1exandria- '

Africa

Fig. 7-1: The Byzantine Empire during medieval times. The highlighted areas are mostly coastal, and mainly encompass the regions of the Eastern Mediterranean, where Venice exploited trade posts such as Famagusta, Cyprus, seen here under Byzantine control.

49 The political association Venice maintained with the Byzantine Empire (Fig. 7-1) was a catalyst in helping the city become a leading western emporium for the trade of

Mediterranean spices obtained from the east, a type of trade that not only included food flavorings like pepper and ginger, but ranging to cotton, mineral dye, and feathers brought from ports in Constantinople, Alexandria, and other eastern ports (Chambers,

1970, pp 8). The possession of these fine items, combined with Venice's accessibility to

Germanic Europe through eastern passes over the Alps and by the same inland rivers with which they traded made Venice a market of extreme importance not just to Europe but to other nations (Chambers, 1970, pp 8). For instance, the wealth of minerals produced from middle Europe like silver, copper, and iron was brought through Venice by German merchants who wanted the rare Mediterranean goods in exchange (Chambers, 1970, pp.

8). It gave them authority of the Dalmatian Coast, and when Venice aided Byzantine in the conquest/suppression of the Normans who were attacking both Italy and areas along the Adriatic (Fig. 7-2), the Byzantine government rewarded Venice with preference and customs exemptions in their ports (Chambers, 1970, pp 8). This just made gaining wealth and power in the trade market of the Mediterranean that much easier for the city.

50 Fig. 7-2: Venetian trade routes during the I and 15th century around present-day Italy. Notice the control they had over passages along the eastern seaboard and western seaboard of the Adriatic Sea. Following the routes along the coast of the southern tip of Italy, they branch off of Sicily and bounce east to Greece and eventually Famagusta, Cyprus.

Venice was becoming the most versatile and powerful commercial empire in the

Mediterranean. The strength of Venice did not lie in own products, although it produced such things as , silk, woolens, salt, and chemicals. The basis of its strength and wealth was in the business of importing and exporting goods; in the knowledge of the markets and in navigational skills. The variety of goods that was demanded in the

Mediterranean caused the Venetians to trade all over the known world (Fig. 7-3). Venice acted like a distributor or a shipping depot. Venice would travel all over the world and trade for rare goods. Next they would then distribute these goods all over the

51 Mediterranean Sea. The reason why it worked so well for Venice was their control over the trade routes.

MAIN MEDITERRANEAN AND BLACK SEA ROUTES IN MEDIEVAL TIMES

MAIN GENOAN ROUTES MAIN CONNECTING POUTES --- MAIN VENETIAN ROUTES

Fig 7-3: The main sea passages for Venetian and their rival Genoese trading vessels. The routes run from every corner of Europe to the deep Middle East. Notice the enormous amount of traffic at Famagusta. This map shows how vessels probably departed from ports in the Black Sea and to Famagusta to drop off and pickup supplies there, to be eventually distributed all over Venice's trading domain.

52 Fig 7-4: The main trade route for salt from to Venice. All that traveled through Cairo and Alexandria most likely diverged its way over to Famagusta for shipping to the Black Sea and Greece.

The advantage of this was paying no taxes, something its partners began to dislike.

Venice would tax other countries and also charge them a toll for the use of their routes.

Their trading domain had begun in the Adriatic Sea, leading to protective treatises with

important Slav ports, and grew to include most of the Byzantine Empire (Chambers,

1970, pp 42). Venetian trade routes stretched as far south (Fig. 7-4) as Fatimid Egypt and

as east as Latin Jerusalem (Chambers, 1970, pp 42). The Venetians had created a vast

network of routes that brought in rare and diverse goods for merchants to exchange. In

Eastern Europe and Russia came precious metals. Ships from Constantinople and Greece

brought a massive amount of silks: a few were the beautiful finished products of

Byzantine state silk , others were from Greece and came from Jewish

53 craftsmanship. From Greece also came wax, honey, oil, wheat, and sweet wines. Most of the wealth of Venice did not come from this place but came from the luxuries of the East, which included spices, silks (Fig. 7-5, 7-6), and perfumes. The traffic from the East came by with several major trade routes. During the 13 th and 14th centuries the Mongolian empire was united causing stability in central Asia enabling goods to be traveled overland from China itself or were shipped across the Indian Ocean to Ormuz at the mouth of

Persian Gulf, from there to flow across western Persia and northern Syria to the

Mediterranean. The spices that they were trading in the east included pepper, cinnamon, ginger, and cloves. These spices had a great demand because at this time they knew few other ways of persevering and seasoning their meats (Lane, 1973, pp 96).

Fig. 7-5: The main route for spice trading during medieval times. Following the red lines, they separate around the Arabian Peninsula and then merge back together again at one specific point: Famagusta. This shows how instrumental possession of the island was for Venice, as most of the spice trade from China and the Indies went through Famagusta's port. This also shows how, when the New World was discovered and a passage around Cape Horn along the southern tip of Africa was found as well, that Famagusta lost importance due to sea travel around the continent being safer and faster then land travel.

54 Fig. 7-6: The two main trade routes for silk from China to Europe during medieval times. The southern most routes, once again, goes directly through Cyprus and Famagusta. This is just another example of why Famagusta was so wealthy and so heavily desired by the Venetians during the 15 th century and leading into the 16th.

In the 14th century the enslavement of the Christian peoples of Caucasus had became a trade . Western Europeans considered only people from the Orthodox churches heretical. Northern Africa was also a great resource for slaves at this time.

Venetians remained ready to trade in human cargo wherever the profits lay. By 1500

A.D. there were 2000 blacks in Venice alone (for more information on Venetian economics see Appendix A).

Located on the eastern coast of Cyprus facing Syria (Fig. 7-8), Famagusta was the

chief business center, and is considered as one of the finest examples of medieval

architecture, in the Mediterranean. Massive walls originally built by earlier French

occupants then revamped and refortified by the Venetians surround this well-preserved

town, known as "Magosa" to the Turkish and as "Ammochostos," meaning sand hidden,

55 to the Greeks (Keshishian, 1995, pp 192). These early defenses were put in place to protect the prospering city from attack by sea-faring warmongers such as the Genoese,

Turks, Spain, and African Pirates. During the city's "Golden Age" (1300-1489) rival factions of Genoese and Venetian merchants began to settle in the city as in gained greater and greater wealth. The Genoese and Venetians were fierce competitors for trade routes in the Mediterranean (Fig. 7-3). But when the final heir of the French Lusignan dynasty passed, his wife of Venetian descent, Catherine Cornaro, became controller of the island of Cyprus. The forced her to give governing power of the island to them, and Venice gained control of the wealthiest trading depot of the 16th century.

T AN TA 4_ yA K E PsFERSIN ALAN yo., 47.4 r` 4.1 I*

f'Zict rat Cyprus art ....1.41710

TA

L TRIPO4 0 so A s

)44 I A

R I A

$400 SA I C/

12s

-37 CA I kr.> •

A

A0.1 A A Fig 7-8: The island of Cyprus and the city of Famagusta. The distances from the island to four major ports of trade during the time are shown. Famagusta opens directly up to Beirut, a major city only 108 miles off the coast of the island.

56 The exchange of Cyprus to Venetian control initially brought a change in governmental structure. The Royal Throne and the Upper House, remnants of the French noble dynasty now passed, were abolished as forms of administration (Georgiades, pp

202). The Locum Tenese held executive authority and a two-year term of office; their powers varied from general administration to judiciary, to defense and financial administration, the latter of which would stand out amongst the government's influences on the island and in the city of Famagusta (Georgiades, pp 202). The administration converted the island's language of authority form French to Italian, while many of the inhabitants spoke Greek. The focus of the new government was aimed at protecting the newly acquired establishment as an investment and as a strategic economic stronghold rather than a position of defensive power. Up to the acquisition of Cyprus in 1489,

Venice continued to practice her policy of commercial expansion: gaining control and defending strategical trade route ports to also gain a series of fiscal and economic privileges like exemptions from trade duties. Cyprus' dangerous location, sitting west of the Ottoman Turks, north of the Byzantine remnants, and centered in Genoa's trade highway, forced the Republic to show a great interest in organizing the military affairs of the island (Georgiades, pp 202). They did this by appointing a general to oversee its defense. The Locum Tenense and the advisors could not in any way interfere in his work

(Georgiades, pp 204). During peaceful periods he acted as a foreman for construction projects of defensive structures on the island, and in time of trouble or war the Republic appointed an overseer whose military authorities were more extensive (Georgiades, pp

204).

57 The Republic had good reason to appoint a military general to guide the city of

Famagusta. During the early 16 th century, Venetian relations with the Turks who had at one time been a valuable asset began to sour. The root of the deterioration of Venetian-

Turk relations was the payment of Cyprus' vassal taxes. Sultan Selim the First of the

Ottoman Empire decided to collect this tax in cash, and this in turn was a severe blow to

Cyprus' economy (Georgiades, pp 204). The Lusignan French had agreed to pay the

Sultan in the form of silk, also know as idare (Georgiades, pp 204). By paying in this method, the island's silk industry flourished, and well as did silk worm cultivation.

When Selim decided to collect this tax in cash, both branches of the silk industry faltered.

With the Venetians trying to muster funds in order to adequately defend Famagusta and other important cities in Cyprus, trying to fill their own coffers, and help the Republic itself, Venice began to feel the economic pressure controlling Cyprus produced

(Georgiades, pp 205). The Republic was forced to begin selling fiefs formerly held by lords to Cypriots, instead of selling them to noble merchants. Settler migration also increased, and the poverty of the island increased proportionally.

These difficulties combined with Venice's need to secure Famagusta and the island for its economic interests, turned the Republic (previously a non-confrontational trading empire) into a harsh tyranny (Georgiades, pp 205). Travelers and merchants who frequented the island during the years of the Venetians rule documented the dire poverty of the people and the measure the Republic used to get money for their objectives

(Georgiades, pp 205). The Venetians ruined the property, honor, and personal freedoms of many Cypriots. This resulted in riots, and even a plea from the people to the Sultan for protection. As Turkish temperament for the Republic deteriorated, the Venetians kept

58 resorting to the same harsh measures in order to achieve continuous occupation of the island and at the same time supply the Republic with funds.

Relations with Turkey worsened when Selim's heir, Suleyman, conquered the island of Rhodes of the coast of Greece (Georgiades, pp 206). The danger for Cyprus increased, as the Turks had now made an aggressive move to secure both a western and eastern boundary around Cyprus. The Turks advanced against the Venetians in Greece, conquering their Aegean islands and their last holdings in Peloponnesus (Georgiades pp.

206). This forced the Venetians to sign a treaty with the Turks acknowledging Suleyman as the sovereign over the newly captured areas. Time peacefully passed, but the Republic knew in 1566 that measures of defending against a new terror, Selim the Second

(Suleyman's heir) would be needed. Selim the Second gave Turkish commanders Lula-

Mustafa and a strong army and large naval fleet, appointing them general and admiral of each (Georgiades pp. 206). The Sultan demanded that Cyprus be turned over to the Turks, and no blood would be shed. The Republic firmly rejected the request, having already begun the construction of the new fortifications around the city of

Famagusta in 1558 over the French walls. Castles and walls were being erected in

Nicosia and Salamis as well, but it was Famagusta where the Venetians had focused their construction and monetary assets.

The Turks then advanced on Cyprus, conquering heavily fortified Nicosia

(Fig. 7-4) on September 9, 1570, a little over one month after the siege had started. The final destination the Turk armies set for the capture of Cyprus was the siege of

Famagusta. The completely redesigned walls of Famagusta and a courageous 7,000-man

59 garrison were then faced with the most daunting task of all: withstanding a Turkish siege from both land and sea of nearly 250 thousand men and 300 ships.

60 Chapter VIII

The Venetian Influence In Famagusta

The Venetians prepared for the onslaught of the city, again, by redesigning the

French Lusignan citadel that had already been constructed. Very little information about the walls pre-Venice was unknown, but what they might have appeared to look like can be reached analogously. Pre-gunpowder siege fortifications relied heavily on preventing the breaching of the walls and gates by foot soldiers and man-powered siege engines.

The French dynasty most likely followed the same styles that were present on many other fortresses throughout Medieval Europe. Famagusta was probably surrounded by extremely tall (i.e. 40-50 feet) curtain walls, extending themselves in a square pattern around the hinterland face of Famagusta. Towers might have been located incrementally along the perimeter of the walls, which was approximately 2 miles and 414 yards in size

(Keshishian, 1995, pp 44). The fortress needed to encompass a relatively small area of city (in modern standards) of only two-tenths of a square mile (Keshishian, 1995, pp 44).

The walls themselves, based on Venetian remodeling, possibly had arrow slits within for ranged defense, but this is subjective.

The team does know of one element of the city walls that the French Lusignan dynasty did construct. Othello's Tower (see Appendix B for information on the origin of the name) was an earlier structure that had specific purposes of which the Venetians did not eliminate in their remodeling of the defenses. The French built the tower in the 14 th

inner harbor of the city from sea faring attackers. This is another century to protect the example of pre-gunpowder siege fortification techniques used by the French. Most pre- gunpowder defense systems had a nucleus in the form of a castle or citadel. This

61 structure lent itself to that purpose. The French made it take the form of a generic castle when they built the Grand Hall, a large dining and gathering room, within its walls.

The castle was known to the French as "The Citadel of Famagusta" and later acquired the name of "Othello's Tower" from belief that Shakespeare's play "Othello" took place within the tower (Keshishian, 1995, pp 48). History appears to tell us that

Shakespeare named the play after the Venetian Lieutenant-Governor of Cyprus

Christoforo Moro who lived in Famagusta from 1506-1508. The name of Shakespeare's play is undoubtedly his own creation though, for the Republic would never let a Moor

(Muslim) hold a position in the or the Army, let alone be governor of the

Republic's most treasured possession at the time (Keshishian, 1995, pp 49).

Nonetheless, Othello's tower was the definitive structure of the French Lusignan defensive arrangement surrounding Famagusta. It signified the influences of Medieval

European military defense design brought forth by the Crusades and most other major battles fought during that time period. The French had constructed a solid perimeter defense of the harbor and the city, although the French Lusignan dynasty had few enemies threatening their hold on Famagusta during its "Golden Age." The Venetians did not have such luck while they occupied Cyprus.

The Venetians were faced with the severely imposing Turkish war machine of the

16th century. Turkish expansion had been aided by the Venetian-Genoese antagonism in the Mediterranean trade competition of the Renaissance; Cyprus had already felt the wrath of the dominion squabbling in the sieges of Paphos and in other raids (Perbellini,

1994, pp 4). Expansion had been easy for the Venetians as well, but the art of retaining

62 lands was not nearly as simple. This caused Venice to develop some of the world's most advanced military engineers, such as Fransesco di Giorgio, who first laid the foundations for the urbanizing of military architecture (Perbellini, 1994, pp 6). The experimental procedure was to extract the blueprint for a perfectly fortified town (Fig. 8-1) (Perbellini,

1994, pp 6). Venice was the first state to put into practice these new proposals for architectural change. The Republic realized the absolute necessity for updating and re- modernizing its defensive system (Perbellini, 1994, pp 6). In the 16 th century, Venice's goal was to find a solution to its military architectural problems, and in turn forged the way for the state to become the most important center for military architecture in all of

Europe (Perbellini, 1994, pp 6). The shift implemented new rules of the magistracy to govern the military architectural activity, turned Renaissance architects into battlefield- educated career operators, and redefined the role of the military engineer.

During this period, many engineers and military officers were involved with the studies and projects set forth by the Republic (Perbellini, 1994, pp 6). They set forth the mission to revitalize defenses against the new form of siege weaponry: firearms. The first adaptation to firearm defense turned out to be out-of-date (Perbellini, 1994, pp 6).

Basillo dell Scola and Bartelomeo d' Alviano conceived a defensive plan for a fortification arrangement backed by 5 large, round towers, similar to those used in earlier fortifications (Perbellini, 1994, pp 6). Though this plan became obsolete, it gave

Bartolomeo d' Alviano and Fra Giocondo (who had used the same 5-tower plan for the reconstruction of the walls in Padua) experimental failure of their design, and lead to improvements in the architectural design in the Eastern Venetian dominions (Cyprus) of which they were also working in (Perbellini, 1994, pp 6). Michelle Leoni (1522)

63 perfected the round tower model in Verona with the Boccare bastion, which also immediately turned out to be unsuitable because of the smoke produced from artillery fire

(Perbellini, 1994, pp 7). A few years later, Michelle Sanmicheli (an engineer acquainted with Franceso di Giorgio) made pentagonal bastions for the walls of Verona (Perbellini,

1994, pp 7). Finally the Republic had a successful model to modernize its outdated fortifications with. Work on perfecting the design of the bastion continued with contributions from Maria d' Urbino, Gian Giralamo, and Guidobaldo II, finally reaching influential trends to commander Girolamo Martinengo (Perbellini, 1994, pp 7). The design of the bastion was quickly evolving and the process was smooth. The main stage for the development of this Venetian design lies in the city walls surrounding Famagusta

(Fig. 8-8 a, b, c). There the retired flank batteries and the cylindrical cavaliers comprise

the structure of the Martinengo Bastion (Fig. 8-3, 8-4, 8-5, 8-6), which was technologically the final answer to bastion design unsurpassed until the end of the 18 th

pp 7). The same can be said for the geometry of the city century (Perbellini, 1994,

layout, where the idea of defensive fortifications and their relationship to the habitat they

protect was optimized; it was when the heavily fortified city of Nicosia (Fig. 8-2) fell that

the Venetian engineers realized how dangerous it was to separate the city's habitations

from the defenses (Perbellini, 1994, pp 7).

64 4,S4

ArIVIW

Fig 8-1: The Venetian design projected to be the final solution to urban siege defense. The symmetry amongst the bastions and the walls, along with the "star" shape is typical of all Venetian design.

65 Fig 8-2: The final design for the fortifications surrounding the capital city of Nicosia. Notice how this design is nearly identical to that of the design in Fig. 7-2. The spreading of the habitations within the wall doomed the inner city, and Nicosia fell to the Turks hard and fast.

Fig. 8-3: The massive Martinengo bastion. The damage of both cannon balls and years of weather can be seen, but one can imagine the sheer power of the design. Afterall, it has withstood over 200 thousand soldiers and 400 years of wear.

66 Fig. 8-4: The parapets along the Martinengo bastion. This drawing show the slope at which cannons were pushed up to the escarpment face.

Fig. 8-5: Another design change implemented in the Martinengo bastion. The example in schematic "d" shows a wide, cumbersome bastion much like the ones used to defend Nicosia, where as "e" is smaller but containing a sharper point which in turn creates sharper angles for firing artillery.

67 ,/

0 10 30m

a

3

Fig 8-6: Schematic showing the development of a bastion similar to the Martinengo Bastion. The only difference here is the presence of a former gate, which is blocked of to build the parapets of the bastion.

Famagusta's defenses had needed reconstruction since as early as 1491 due to devastating earthquakes and Ottoman Turk expansion in the Mediterranean (Perbellini,

1994, pp 8). Famagusta was the base of the Venetian Arsenal while it occupied Cyprus

(Perbellini, 1994, pp 8). It was for this reason that extensive and expensive design changes in the fortifications surrounding both the city and the harbor were implemented in the mid-16th century. The first renovations began with Othello's Tower, where

Venetian commander Nicolo Foscarini inscribed his name under the Venetian lion believing Venice was on the verge of creating the ultimate defensive arrangement against their enemies. The size of the tower was increased vertically to give defending cannon a longer range and higher trajectory to assault incoming sea vessels. Many engineers had influences in the designing of the walls, from Ercole Martinengo, Michele Sanmicheli,

Geralamo Maggi, Astorre Baglioni, to Luigi Martinengo and Gian Battista (Perbellini,

68 1994, pp 8). The enlargement and reinforcement of the walls goes back to Cay. Orogoli in 1536 (Perbellini, 1994, pp 8). It was his catalogues of the design ideas of the fort that influenced the walls the most. The project itself anticipated twelve round towers at intervals along the three and a half kilometer surface (which proves that the earlier

French design did not have towers along the walls) and a deep ditch dug in the surrounding it (Fig. 8-8 a, b, c) (Perbellini, 1994, pp 8). The path of the walls had the first sign of a of its northern side, which was obtained by using a zigzag wall between the Mozzo and Diamond Bastions (Perbellini, 1994, pp 8). By 1558, Ercole

Marinengo and Giangirolamo Sanmicheli had begun to modernize the wall with a pentagonal bastion on the north vertex of the wall (Fig. 8-6) (Perbellini, 1994, pp 8). The walls of Famagusta had gone through a transitional phase, one in which the walls were reinforced with bulwarks or semi-bulwarks with circular or octagonal bases. The design of the protecting the Gate (The Land Gate) was tedious and extensive

(Fig. 8-7) (Perbellini, 1994, pp 17-19).

69 C

I tt

b e

Fig 8-7: Schematic showing the steps Fransisco di Giorgio designed and many other Venetian military engineers implemented in the construction of the Ravelin and the Land Gate leading into the city of Famagusta. The focus of the design is constructing a bastion like platform over the gate to harbor artillery.

After the Venetians completed re-modernizing the walls of Famagusta, the structures were considerably different in appearrance (Fig 8-8 a, b, c). The walls themselves went from large to massive in size. They were on the average of 50 feet (15.2 meters) in height and 27 feet (8.3 meters) thick in some places (Keshishian, 1995, pp 44).

The walls were lined with 12 bastions spanning equidistantly along the 2-mile perimeter.

The most heavily defended area of the wall was the tenaille on the northern side bordered by the massive, pentagonal, angular Martinengo Bastion (named after the Brescian Count

Ercole Martinengo, its official engineer) and the cornerstone Diamante Bastion facing

70 the Outer Harbor. Only 667 yards separated these two large defensive structures, probably because the Venetians anticipated that the Turks would come in full force along the Northern side (Keshishian, 1995, pp 44). The ditch (moat), which had been the staple of siege fortification since the advent of the curtain wall, was wide and very deep. The width of it, all dug into rock, was some 50 yards on the average (Keshishian, 1995, pp

44). The height of the moat from the bottom to some arbitrary point (such as the Land

Gate) reached as high as 20 yards (Keshishian, 1995, pp 44).

MART IN

134 A

PA w,4 CAZAFT oz sag* OUTER sea H BOU R FAMAGUST,1 5 tGNDRU NA 0 k4EDIAEVAL WALLED C IT 5 40R AT 10 OTHE Ld TOW 11/4\ ,9 6 s 1 16„44 7 0 t nc, A Lit nesivol Ser. s)

LAND KATE

(.11i R IRE1 711a„._ 1 I- R L VARO SRA ..\\

A.NTA NA PA DE D AMMO rekt A RSE HAL Spade in %yids R ONE. ix 0 200 3 00 YorisAMP°S.” ALE VAROSHA (A)

71 gLISTA- EDIAEVAL WALLED CITY

rt.

( C)

Fig. 8-8 (A, B, C): Three different perspectives and drawings of the city of Famagusta's walls from an overhead view. It is easy to tell that the Venetians built their design over old existing walls. The bastions are placed incrementally along the walls, dominated by the massive Martinengo bastion.

72 When the Turks finally arrived to seize the city in September of 1571, they encountered a fully defended fortress in the form of Famagusta. The Turkish army consisted of nearly 250,000 men, while the Republic only garrisoned a mere 8,000 to the walls of the city. They attacked from all angles, but most principally from the southeastern tip where the Arsenal Tower (now Djambulat's Bastion) was located. This tall, conspicuous tower seemed like the perfect area for the Turks to concentrate their attack; the northern side of the city was heavily guarded, and the Land Gate side was vast and difficult to man. It was at the Arsenal Tower where the Turks made a very fatal mistake. The Venetians had constructed a special machine at the narrow entrance of the

Arsenal. The machine had a wheel covered with knives that cut to pieces many Turks who tried to force their way into the entrance (Keshishian, 1995, pp 198). The siege lasted 11 months, with the Venetians cutting down Turkish forces left and right behind their superior defenses. Only when all supplies of food and water to the interior of the city were exhausted and the individuals within began to suffer, did the Venetians

surrender. This was not before the siege had taken the lives of nearly 200,000 Turks.

The technological superiority of the defenses surrounding Famagusta need no more

evidence than this fact alone.

73 Chapter IX

Conclusion

When this projected was initiated, the scope was to analyze Venetian technology and the range of effects it had on Mediterranean society, with a focus on the city of

Famagusta. What the project eventually culminated into was a study on the changes in engineering trends of warfare technology based around the effects of gunpowder, and equating these trends to those implemented by the Venetians in their reconstruction of the defensive fortifications surrounding Famagusta.

This study shows that the concept of engineering creativity was existent before the term "engineer" was even used to describe a vocation. In early medieval times, architects were hired by nobles to design structures used to defend the various lands that made them wealthy. These architects were engineers without the title. They held an ethical and moral responsibility to research and develop the best design possible to protect their employer's assets while at the same time creating a barrier of protection for people against the dangers of war. They had to be schooled on the latest advances in technology, as well as being a master in mathematical fields such as geometry. They used their skill and creativity to adapt their designs to the weapons used in siege warfare.

There was a major shift in the engineering philosophy of these architects. The presence of artillery powered by gunpowder and explosive projectiles forced the architects to drastically change the face of fortifications that had been prevalent for hundreds of years. Walls shortened and thickened, domiciles became under tire, and the military architects of the 15 th and 16th century were entrusted with the task of creating an effective means of defense against the new weapons of war. Generations of teachers and

74 students, masters and apprentices labored over schematics trying to find the best solution.

Each new idea or design was field tested through battle. Architects learned as their brethren's designs faltered and failed. The Venetian architects were able to study these situations the most, due to the number of fortifications Venice had seized through the 15 th

th century. They researched and planned, eventually implementing the ultimate and 16 design by reconstructing the walls surrounding Famagusta.

This project essentially describes an example of technological evolution and the manner in which military engineers over 500 years ago adapted their philosophies to that evolutionary process. The study proves the concept of engineering during the medieval and Renaissance time periods even though there were no formal "engineers" at the time.

The Venetian presence in Famagusta was completely destroyed after the Turks eventually seized the city, as they killed all 8,000 of the remaining habitants. Though this does not show a direct correlation to the Venetian influence on the Famagusta society in the 16 th

century, it is an example of how technology changed the society in general.

Many sources of possible pertinent information to the report were not used for certain reasons. Along the process of developing a database for the report writing, the group came across many books written in foreign languages such as Italian and Greek that could have been relevant to the subject of the report. Also, there could be much more statistical data gathered from the city of Famagusta possibly by a personal visit to the city itself. The analogous relationship the group developed in the report could also be expanded upon with the gathering of more books relating to military architecture and siege weaponry during the time period after gun powder became a factor in warfare technology.

75 The IQP process taught the members of the group the value of research. The group was lead through a painstaking process on finding a direction for the research early in the project's development. The group learned how to reach a goal by circumventing the obvious routed of finding material directly related to the topic. Each member's ability to search and recover books, journal articles, and any research material on a rare topic was mastered. The team was taught the value of working interactively with knowledgeable professors who were able to guide us in the right direction. Essentially, the group learned the fundamental principles behind conducting a research project on an element of technology.

What personally was learned about the subject of the team's IQP was that engineers have been working amongst our societies for centuries. In today's world, the term "engineer" is thrown around loosely. What it means to the members of the group is the ability to apply knowledge of math and science to a technological problem and come away with a creative and distinct solution free of faults previously realized by similarly engineered solutions. The team that developed this report learned the importance of engineering to by studying the importance the Venetian military architects stressed on designing the best fortifications under their technological boundaries.

The team learned a great deal from the undertaking of this IQP, such as the struggles of completing the goals that were initially set at the beginning of the project.

The project participants have become very knowledgeable on a subject that, when commencing the IQP, little was known about. The group has grasped the overall goal of the IQP in studying the effect technology has on society, or vice versa. The team members that have worked on this report hopes that this topic remains open for a future

76 IQP so that any prospective project teams will have the opportunity to learn about this interesting and insightful historical example of engineering and technology's effect on society.

77 Bibliography

Adams, Nicholas and Pepper, Simon, Firearms and Fortifications, University of Chicago

Press; Chicago1986.

Bradbury, Jim, The Medieval Siege, Boydell Press; Rochester, NY 1992.

Brice, Martin, Stronghold, Shocken Books; New York 1985.

Chambers, D.S., The Imperial Age of Venice, Thames and Hudson; London 1970.

Davis, John, Venice, Newsweek; New York 1973.

Duffy, Christopher, Siege Warfare, Routledge & Kegan Paul; London 1979.

Georgiades, Cleanthis, History of Cyprus, Demetrakis Christophorou; Kykko, Cyprus.

Hughes, Quentin, Fortress, Lund Humphries; London 1969.

Hughes, Quentin, Military Architecture, Ltd.; Great Brittain 1991.

Kent, John, Venice: a colour guide to the city, Viking; London 1988.

Keshishian, Kevork , Famagusta Town and District, Famagusta Chamber of

Commerce & Industry; Nicosia, Cyprus 1985.

Keshishian, Kevork, Romantic Cyprus, Romantic Cyprus Pulications; Nicosia, Cyprus

1992.

Klaus and Hillenbrand, Cyprus, Edition Erde Travel Guide.

Lane, Frederic, Venice: A Maritime Republic,: The Johns Hopkins University Press;

Baltimore and London 1973.

Perbellini, Gianni, The, fortress of Nicosia: prototype of European Renaissance military

architecture, Nicosia: Anastasios G. Leventis Foundation, 1994.

Tracy, James, City Walls, Cambridge University Press; New York 2000.

78 Thubron, Colin, The Venetians, Time Life Books; Alexandria, Virginia 1980.

Viollet-le-Duc, E.E, Military Architecture, Greenhill Books; London 1990. Appendix A

The Venetian monetary unit, the gold ducat (Fig. A-1), became and adopted mean of currency for many other cities due to the number of times they were paying the

Fig. A-1: The Venetian monetary unit, the ducat. The front side is on the left and the backside is on the right. The Christian figure on the money is the Republic's patron saint, St. Mark.

Venetians for the transport of goods within their empire. By the year 1423, cities such as

Florence and Cairo, as well as many merchants representing the country of Spain, had imitated or adopted the ducat as their preferred currency (Chambers, 1970, pp 34). It was estimated that at this time Venice was minting the ducat at a rate of one million ducats per year (Chambers, 1970, pp 34). The amount of Venice's gold and silver coinage symbolized and physically represented the city's great collective wealth, which was greater than any other city in Christendom (Europe, Mediterranean, Middle East) during

Venice's imperial age (Chambers, 1970, pp 36).

80 Other countries did not just pour their commerce into Venice without some reassurance. That came in the form of Venice's mighty fleet of ships. The large sea faring vessels that controlled the success of Venice's commercial empire were the most technologically advanced ships of the time. They were secure means of transporting valuable and precious materials; secure both physically and operationally. Each vessel was State-run (the Venetian government being the responsible party), and they provided safe and rapid transport of goods from Syria all the way to England (Chambers, 1970, pp

36).

As for the Ships themselves, the Venetian merchant marine by 1423 numbered roughly 3000 craft and out of population of a mere 150,000, Venice's 36,000 seamen made up a large proportion of the republics work force; nearly 25% of the city's population was employed by the trading industry (Lane, 1973 pp 145).

Venice became not only the forbearer of trading exploits in the Mediterranean, but was now the most technologically advanced society in the region. The platform for experimental research and application of design in the field presented itself more so for the Venetians than it did for any other society because their dominion was so vast and diverse. Today the elements of their influence have long since disappeared, except for the astounding defensive structures the Venetians built around the Mediterranean depot of Famagusta.

Most vessels of the fleet were lateener caravels: which were low, light transport craft, perfect for costal trade. In the 14th century the large round ship was typically a single-masted, square-rigged carrier called a cog. A cog roughly weighted 300 tons or more and had a crew of 30 men (Lane, 1973, pp 147). In 1514 the enormous cog turned

81 into a . The galley had three lateen sails and was able to travel 2500 miles in 31 days. Not as important as its speed was it combat power (Lane, 1973, pp 147). They usually traveled in groups of 3 or 4 each ship carried a crew of 200 men. In the event of an attack, the rowers were issued swords and pikes from the ships hold, and gave a good account of themselves. These rowers were more important as a guard rather then a rower.

These ships also carried 20 to 30 bowmen (gunners) (Lane, 1973, pp 148). These men in battle would take their posts in prow and stern or the central gateway. Since there were seven major trade routes their were seven major galley groups which included the Galley of Alexandria, Galley of Beirut, Galley of Romania, Galley of Barbary, Galley of

Northeast Africa, Galley of Aigues-Mortes, and Galley of Flanders (Lane, 1973, pp 147).

In the mid 15 th century, the state had become so protective of great galleys that it prohibited the constructing of this ships anywhere except in the Arsenal (Lane, 1973, pp149). The Arsenal was the place where the galleys were designed, built, and outfitted.

This was the largest industrial complex in Europe. The Arsenal was state ran and only the exact and uniform specifications were decided upon the Senate. In 1544 there were 12 galleys built and all of them were 132.5 feet long at deck level and 22.5 feet across beam.

In 1470 a Venetian fleet of some 40 galleys found a Turkish fleet, which consisted of 100 war galleys and 200 other ships supporting them (Lane, 1973, pp 149). The 40 Venetian

Galleys ran away safe but the encounter provoked the republic to extend the Arsenal.

When the work was complete, the complex covered some 60 acres; the open-air docks were covered so that work could continue during all types of weather. By 1480 the

Arsenal provided covered accommodation for the simultaneous construction of 80 galleys; soon afterward the number increased to 116 (Lane, 1973, pp 149). The walls of

82 the Arsenal rose 50 feet above the surrounding canals and ran for 2 miles in circumference. The Arsenal was also the center of all industry which included: Bronze casters and iron smelters, armories of blades and breastplates, mixers of gunpowder, brewers of pitch and saltpeter- craftsmen skilled in fashioning every kind of artillery and siege weapon labored here, building and testing the newest and most destructive inventions (Lane, 1973, pp 149).

83 Appendix B

Othello's Tower

The Tower of Othello is the present day title given to the citadel built by the

French Lusignans for defense of the port of Famagusta in the 14 th century (Keshishian,

1995, pp 48). The Grand Hall built within is also of French origin. The top of the main entrance is graced with a stone figurine representing the winged-lion of St. Mark of the

Republic of Venice and the name Nicolo Foscarini, the Venetian captain who remodeled the citadel in 1492 (Keshishian, 1995, pp 48).

Supposedly Shakespeare's tragedy "Othello — The Moor of Venice" took place within this tower. It appears that Shakespeare possible named his piece after a Venetian lieutenant governor of Cyprus, Christoforo Moro who resided in Famagusta from 1506-

1508 and whose coat of arms had three mulberries ("moro" means black mulberry or

Moor/Muslim) (Keshishian, 1995, pp 48). The source of the play is thought to have been the setting of Giambattista Cinthio's "Desdemona" published in 1565, while John Ford's

"The Lover's Melancholy" (1628) is set in the same place.

The name of "Othello-The Moor of Venice" is no doubt Shakespeare's creation as there is no record of such a name in the Venetian state archives (Keshishian, 1995, pp

48). It is inferred that he must have taken the surname Moro and used it for the hypothetical name of a Moor. During the Renaissance, it was impossible for a Moor

(Muslim) to hold an office in the or Army, let alone be a lieutenant governor of their most treasured island (Keshishian, 1995, pp 48). Also, the scene of the play must have been in the Palace of the as it befits to be the residence of a lieutenant governor (Keshishian, 1995, pp 48).

84